Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION VS Respondent: MUHAMMAD YUSUF SHAMI
1988 S C M R 462
1988 S C M R 462
Present: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan, JJ
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION and others--Petitioners
versus
MUHAMMAD YUSUF SHAMI--Respondents
Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 39, 43 and 44 of 1987.
(From the judgment dated 28-10-1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, passed in Appeals Nos.294/817, 283/819 and 282/818, respectively, all of 1986) .
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--
--Art.212(3)--Civil service- -Expunction of adverse remarks in Annual Confidential Reports--Order of Tribunal expunging adverse remarks in A . C . Rs . challenged-- Remarks in question found biased--Plea that Tribunal had acted on comments of Regional Director of the Department whereas more appropriate authority to give comments was the Director, repelled because before Tribunal petitioner had not disowned comments of Regional Office--No substantial question of law of public importance arising, leave to appeal refused.
S.M. Zubair, A.-G., Faiz Muhammad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yusuf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Sh. Munir Ahmad Advocate-on-Record for Respondent. Date of hearing: 12th January, 1988.
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--In these petitions for special leave to appeal the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders dated 28th October. 1986 of the Punjab Service Tribunal expunging the adverse remarks recorded in the annual confidential reports of the respondent. orders of the Tribunal are based on a finding that the remarks question were biased.
2. In support of these petitions, it is urged by the learned Additional Advocate-General that the Tribunal has acted on the comments of the Director of Education, Lahore Region, whereas the more appropriate authority to give comments was the Director Education, Rawalpindi Division. We find no merit in this contention, for, it does not appear that before the Tribunal the Education Department had disowned the comments of the Lahore Directorate. In any event, no substantial question of law of public importance arises in these petitions. Leave to appeal is refused.
M.I. /D-15/S Petition dismissed.